A Part of Speech by Joseph Brodsky
Published 1977 · 152 pages · 4,460 words · Poetry
How hard is A Part of Speech to read?
A Part of Speech scores 44 out of 100 for difficulty on ReadingRate, making it moderately challenging. The score is a weighted composite of nine measures: four of how hard the prose is to parse, five of how hard the meaning is to extract.
- Vocabulary: 40 out of 100
- The text uses a mix of accessible language and slightly elevated terms like 'eloquence,' 'myriad,' 'construed,' and 'hypotaxis' (though 'velskolede' appears to be a typo for 'well-schooled'). While not dense with archaic words like 'Moby-Dick,' it occasionally employs more formal or academic vocabulary, especially in the introductory and analytical sections. The core speeches, however, are generally clear.
- Sentence structure: 45 out of 100
- Sentences are generally of moderate length, with some compound and complex structures, particularly in the descriptive passages about Chief Seattle's presence and the historical context. While there are no excessively long or nested sentences akin to Jamesian prose, the text does feature some run-on sentences and awkward phrasing, which can momentarily impede flow. This is more complex than '1984' but far from the extreme hypotaxis of 'The Golden Bowl'.
- Abstraction: 60 out of 100
- The text begins with a concrete historical overview of Chief Seattle's speech, but quickly moves into abstract interpretations of its meaning, cultural impact, and philosophical implications regarding nature and human connection. Ted Perry's version, in particular, is highly abstract, personifying nature and discussing concepts like 'loneliness of spirit' and the interconnectedness of all things. This blend of historical detail and profound thematic exploration elevates its abstraction beyond simple narrative.
- Information density: 55 out of 100
- The text presents a considerable amount of information, including historical context, linguistic details (chinook-jargon), different interpretations of the speech across decades, and then two distinct versions of the speech itself. While not overwhelmingly dense like 'Ulysses,' it requires attention to track the various layers of information, from factual accounts to philosophical arguments and poetic imagery. The shifts between historical analysis and the speeches themselves demand a flexible reading approach.
- Narrative indirection: 35 out of 100
- The provided text directly explains the historical context and various interpretations of Chief Seattle's speech, explicitly detailing the evolution of its meaning and discrepancies between versions. Readers are largely told the information, requiring minimal inference about the author's message or the narrative of the speech's history.
- Symbolic density: 25 out of 100
- The text itself, as an analytical and expository piece, does not employ high symbolic density in its own narrative or structure. While it discusses the rich symbolism within Chief Seattle's speech (e.g., earth as mother, rivers as brothers), the framing text is straightforward and literal in its presentation of information. Its purpose is to explain and analyze, not to embody, complex symbolism.
- Ironic distance: 55 out of 100
- The text establishes a clear ironic distance by highlighting the discrepancy between the popular, environmentally-focused Ted Perry version of the speech and its historical and cultural inaccuracies. It subtly critiques the 'stereotype of Indians' that Perry's version fulfills, creating a gap between the widely accepted narrative and the presented facts.
- Resolution withholding: 65 out of 100
- The text explicitly withholds a definitive interpretive resolution, inviting the reader to 'even decide what you think thereof' regarding the different versions of the speech. While factual discrepancies are laid bare, the ultimate judgment on the 'beauty' or validity of each interpretation is left open.
- Structural complexity: 30 out of 100
- The text follows a clear, linear structure, beginning with an introduction to Chief Seattle's speech, presenting two distinct versions sequentially, and concluding with related information. There are no significant timeline jumps, shifts in point of view, or experimental formal elements.
How A Part of Speech is regarded
A Part of Speech holds a literary regard score of 81 out of 100, weighing its place in the canon, its critical reception, its influence on other writers, and the standing of its author. Regard is measured separately from difficulty: a demanding book is not necessarily an admired one.